Nairn and National Disability Insurance Agency

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) considered the case of *Nairn and National Disability Insurance Agency*. The applicant, Nairn, sought review of a decision by the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA) to refuse funding for a specific type of therapy. The core of the dispute concerned whether the requested therapy was a reasonable and necessary support under the *National Disability Insurance Scheme Act 2013* (Cth).

The Tribunal was required to determine whether the therapy, described as 'intensive speech pathology intervention', constituted a reasonable and necessary support for the applicant, having regard to the criteria set out in section 34 of the NDIS Act. This involved assessing whether the therapy was likely to be effective and beneficial for the applicant's disability-related needs, whether it represented value for money, and whether it was most appropriately funded or provided through the NDIS.

Deputy President Forgie P found that while the applicant had a significant disability and required support, the evidence presented did not sufficiently demonstrate that the specific intensive speech pathology intervention sought was the most appropriate and effective form of support. The Tribunal considered the available evidence regarding the applicant's progress with existing therapies and the general evidence base for the proposed intervention. The Deputy President applied the principles of reasonableness and necessity as defined in the NDIS Act, concluding that the applicant had not discharged the onus of proving that the requested therapy met all the statutory criteria.

The Tribunal affirmed the NDIA's decision to refuse funding for the specific intensive speech pathology intervention.